1 / 26

Grassland Bird Conservation and Monitoring in the Upper Midwest

Grassland Bird Conservation and Monitoring in the Upper Midwest. 28 February 2011 Given the way grassland birds use landscapes (in terms of space and time), it’s advantageous to take a (regional) collaborative approach. Challenges for Grassland Bird Conservation.

presta
Download Presentation

Grassland Bird Conservation and Monitoring in the Upper Midwest

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Grassland Bird Conservation and Monitoring in the Upper Midwest 28 February 2011 Given the way grassland birds use landscapes (in terms of space and time), it’s advantageous to take a (regional) collaborative approach

  2. Challenges for Grassland Bird Conservation 1. They occur mostly on private land. 2. Ag-ecosystems are in a constant state of flux 3. Research indicates the need for grassy landscapes (how big?) with a variety of habitat types 4. Mapping grasslands (and successive models) is really difficult, bordering on worthless at local scales, and makes all of this even more challenging. 5. There is a high risk that any one manager can be implementing habitat that isn't "working" to create source populations. This is a scary premise given the amount of money we have to work on these birds and the rapid rate at which these landscapes are moving in an ever-increasing hostile direction.

  3. Roadmap for Grassland Bird Conservation

  4. Grassland bird biological planning and conservation design • HAPET Office (PPJV) • Thunderstorm maps (Quamen 2007) • http://www.ppjv.org/thunderstorm_maps.htm • UMRGLR JV Science Office • JV Implementation Plan (2007) • Currently working on GBCA modeling for JV region • CHJV Science Office • Conservation design tools online (http://www.chjv.org/CHJV_Conservation_Planning.html) • National Bobwhite Conservation Initiative • Quail focus areas (counties);

  5. GOAL = density estimates for grassland birds are actually tied to management practices • According to preliminary modeling exercises, important areas for grassland birds occur in IL, MO and KS (species richness maps based on focal species (HESP, USPA, EAME))

  6. Central Hardwoods Conservation Design requires: 1. An assessment of current habitat conditions and potential threats to habitat, including an estimate of how conditions compare with a landscape’s ecological potential. Our landscape assessments are framed within a hierarchy of ecologically similar units.2. An evaluation of bird-habitat relationships and current bird distributions in relation to land use and land cover. (Grass-Shrubland Bird Assessment) 3. A determination of where on the landscape sufficient amounts of habitat of the required types can be protected or restored to support bird population objectives. (Northern Bobwhite Conservation | Ecological Potential Model) 4. An assessment of ownership patterns and trends in land use to determine where conservation actions can be implemented with the greatest probability of success. ( Map of ownership) 5. Monitoring and evaluation to determine whether populations are responding to conservation efforts as assumed during the planning process. ( Assessment of Savanna-Woodland Restorations)

  7. National Bobwhite Conservation Initiative Quail Focus Areas (min and max acres for CY 2010): • Indiana (5,184 to 346,706) • Missouri (736 to 239,983) Website: http://bringbackbobwhites.org 95% of the grasslands in USFWS Region 3 are in private ownership (strong tie to Farm Bill Policy) Incorporates economics into conservation models

  8. National Bobwhite Conservation Initiative How do you package grassland bird conservation? Lessons from NBCI: • Clear objectives • Clear metric of success • Maps, by county, of where we should work (gives direction to practitioners)

  9. Goals and Objectives Joint Venture State Focal Landscape “If we want to be successful for grassland birds, then ____ is what we need to build.”

  10. Focal Landscape Goals (WI) • Increase in the number of EAME over a ten year period. (+ other species) (This will require some level of monitoring across that project area.) • Number of BCAs (habitat goal)

  11. Grassland Bird Conservation Areas • Open country matrix • Large core grassland block • Scattered surrounding grassland blocks • Not mutually exclusive of CRP patches • We need a replicated, experimental monitoring program on BCAs throughout the Upper Midwest!

  12. How Grassland Bird Conservation Area (GBCA) models are being used throughout the Midwest • Number of GBCAs already designated: • Illinois = 8 • Iowa = 8 (1 overlaps with a Quail Focus Area) http://www.iowadnr.com/wildlife/files/BCA_index.html • Indiana = working with CHJV and IBAs on this • Minnesota = HAPET GBCA approach • Missouri = working with NBCI • Wisconsin = none yet (goal of 10) • NBCI = Many (varies by state)

  13. How Grassland Bird Conservation Area (GBCA) models are being used throughout the Midwest • Overall Size of Matrix: • Illinois = 10,000 – 15,000 acres • Iowa = 10,000 + acres • Wisconsin = 10,000 acres • NBCI = varies from several hundred to 300,000

  14. How Grassland Bird Conservation Area (GBCA) models are being used throughout the Midwest • Size of the BGCA Core: • Illinois = 320 – 5,000 acres • Iowa = 20% of overall (at least 2,000 acres) • Wisconsin = 2,000 acres (some areas have a lot of grass, whereas others have no protected core) • NBCI = to be determined in August 2011

  15. How Grassland Bird Conservation Area (GBCA) models are being used throughout the Midwest • Landscape Context (% openland): • Illinois goal of >40% grassland and <10% wooded or developed (reality is more variable) • Iowa = minimum of 25% grassland • Wisconsin = 40-60% grass with less than 20% trees/hostile habitat • NBCI = 75%

  16. How Grassland Bird Conservation Area (GBCA) models are being used throughout the Midwest • Metric for success • Illinois = Acreages (protected, restored/re-created, enhanced), bird abundance/trends • Iowa = Presence of SGCN and nesting success; would like to use population estimates in the future (that are tiered to regional goals) • Wisconsin = bird population estimates • NBCI = quail per unit area (incorporates detection probability)

  17. How will we monitor our efforts? Statewide: • Change in focal species populations (index) = Federal BBS Landscape: • Change in focal species populations (index) = Road-based BBS routes with habitat monitoring BCA: • Habitat – based focal species monitoring. Change in abundances/densities over time + changes in habitat.

  18. Evaluating our Assumptions • Does the BCA concept lead to source populations of focal species? • This research question will be addressed regionally through the Midwest Coordinated Bird Monitoring Partnership • Initial meta-analysis of demographic data currently underway at U of IL.

  19. What grassland bird monitoring is presently taking place? • Illinois: Annual grassland breeding bird surveys (point counts), focal area roadside surveys, spring lek surveys for greater prairie-chicken, winter raptor surveys (NOHA, SEOW) • Indiana: Systemmatic surveys at Goose Pond, TNC monitoring • Iowa: Conduct annual prairie chicken survey; at least 4 bird (graduate student) research projects have been done in BCAs (primarily looking at nesting/habitat mgt. relationships), annual surveys at Neal Smith NWR

  20. What grassland bird monitoring is presently taking place? • MN and IA (Prairie Pothole portions): Developing a proposal to conduct a baseline inventory of birds on managed and unmanaged grasslands • NPS Heartland I & M Network (MO, IA, NE, MN, IN, OH, AR, KS): variable circular point counts to survey birds and their habitat; points are located on systematic grids across each of our survey area (National Park Service Unit).

  21. What grassland bird monitoring is presently taking place? • Central Hardwoods Grassland Bird Monitoring (Buehler et al.) • Cost = $75,000 / year for entire BCR (24) • Track population trends at meaningful scales • Evaluate the effects of management • Document habitat conditions • Answer key questions: • How much conservation and at what scale do we need to positively affect populations of target species? • What are the thresholds for response? • What is the magnitude of the response? • Answer questions relative to adaptive management • Be statistically rigorous, extensive in nature, cost effective, and implementable by JV/BCR partners • Match protocol to the scale of questions

  22. INHS grassland bird demography synthesis • Looking at Patch Size and Relative Survival in terms of: • Geographic variation • Landscape Context • Structure • Association with Treeless Horizons • Species-specific differences • Predation (spatial and temporal changes in nest predators) • Comparison with winter trends • # CRP contracts in a given area • Site fidelity (survival estimates) • The ultimate goal will be to support decisions on the ground.

  23. Midwest Grassland Bird Technical Subcommittee • Promote grassland bird conservation and serve Grassland Bird Science Needs (of JVs, states, NBCI, etc.) • Provide technical advice to volunteer groups, states, etc. on management, monitoring and restoration of grassland birds • Develop consistency in monitoring and encourage data sharing (via MWADC) to compare results across states • Regional approach to developing targeted Farm Bill practices with incentives for participation • Leverage $$ and volunteers to help with monitoring! • Undertake demographic work • Online workspace at: http://midwestbirdmonitoring.ning.com/group/midwest_grasslandbird

  24. Eastern Grassland Bird Technical Committee • Need to link with NBCI Tech Committee and be embedded within it • We can’t sell grassland bird conservation in terms of grassland birds; need to market it in other terms (consider Pat Keyser and his work with grazing community) • UMRGLR JV, CHJV, BCR 11 (MN & IA), 12, 22, 23, 24 + Southeast individuals • May also incorporate members from USFWS Region 6 (shortgrass prairie)

  25. Midwest Grassland Bird Technical Subcommittee • Where do we need to go from here? • Multi-regional framework for different efforts to fit into • WI proposal to pilot test a monitoring approach to evaluate GBCA success • ?? • How do we engage missing partners? • What is the next most important step?

More Related